The 9-day-old baby with anencephaly, whose inevitable death occurred on Monday, was not allowed to help another endangered child survive by the gift of an organ for transplant.

Her grieving parents were denied the one consolation that might have eased their loss a little.

What Baby Theresa has done, however, is call poignant attention, once again, to the nation's need to cope humanely with medical technology that is raising new issues of life and death and to the legal, moral and bioethical questions that are unresolved.

Theresa's parents, Laura Campo and Justin Pearson, learned several weeks ago their unborn baby had anencephaly and would survive, at most, a few days after birth.

They let the pregnancy continue, finding some small solace in the expectation that in her death, their infant could save one or more other babies by providing organs for transplants.

Campo even endured a Caesarean section to increase the chances that her baby's organs would make useful transplants.

Theresa's condition was never in question. Anencephaly can be diagnosed during pregnancy because the upper part of the skull and scalp and all of the brain except the brain stem are missing.

Most such babies are aborted after the diagnosis is made. It's estimated that about 1,050 infants with anencephaly are born each year, some of them stillbirths. Almost all die within a few days. The longest survival on record is about two months.

The cause of anencephaly is unknown. It is more common in whites than other groups, among girls than boys and in Western Europe and eastern regions of the United States than elsewhere.

Several studies have suggested possible causes, but they have been countered by other research findings.

Babies with anencephaly are described as being "permanently unconscious," although they do show some reflex actions. Doctors assume they do not suffer or have any awareness.

Because diagnosis is obvious and death imminent and inevitable, it's understandable that anencephalic babies would be considered a possible source of organs for transplants for other infants or young children.

It's estimated that annually about 5,000 youngsters need such donations, that about 1,200 actually get them and many of the others die waiting.

But the case for using anencephalic infants as organ donors is medically complicated and ethically troubling, as what happened to Theresa and her parents makes painfully clear.

If such an infant were to be considered primarily as a source of organs for transplants, she would probably be placed on life-support equipment at birth to maintain her body as well as possible until suitable recipients were located and the organs removed. This approach has been used to provide successful transplants from anencephalic newborns.

More commonly, an anencephalic infant is given routine care until respiratory arrest occurs or brain-stem function ceases and she meets the legal definition of death. Sometimes the baby is then placed on life-support to preserve her organs as well as possible for transplantation.

Some successful transplants have been achieved with this process, but usually the organs are not usable by then.

Is it ethically, medically, morally necessary to wait until an anencephalic infant meets the usual criteria for death before using her organs?

Considering the blunt legal question, a South Florida court ruled last week Theresa's vital organs could not be transplanted until all brain activity -- including any function of her brain stem, which controls respiratory and heartbeat -- had ceased.

Most of the bioethicists who have commented on the case agree, saying essentially the organs of the living must not be taken to benefit others, however precarious and doomed the donor's existence.

But how ethically smug should we be? We have taken the easy way out, stuck to the old rules, refused to make a humane exception for fear we cannot stop a slide down an imagined slippery slope of horrors. So a baby who was never conscious endured a few more days of hopeless existence before her condition met the legal definition of death. Her organs had deteriorated beyond usefulness to anyone else.

The child, or children, who might have lived a long lifetime given her heart, her lungs, her liver or her kidneys, will probably die too.

Theresa's family will go without the small comfort of a loving gift of life. Hope will come a bit harder for parents of children on the transplant waiting list.

There are few certainties here. Even when healthy organs are available, they can't always be matched quickly enough with suitable recipients. Some transplants, however promising, don't work.

What is certain is that babies with anencephaly die without ever having been fully alive.

By changing the laws defining death very narrowly and specifically to include congenital absence of almost all of the brain and the consequent lack of consciousness, we could let these infants -- with parental consent -- to give life to children who could live long and well.

Theresa's parents are pushing the question on to the Florida Supreme Court. The Florida governor and the Senate majority leader say they would consider legislative action on the issue. Theresa's existence may yet mean life and hope for others.